Wonder, Haruki...are Kerry or Bush really better when "defining meaningfully" the future of the .Us?
aren´t natural events (by instance) causing progressively so much trouble around , from a while, a visible deconstruction of our pseudo modern world centering our silly minds on $$$ ,greed ,physical comfort and material possession or control of what the masses are tought to blindly buy and consume (SUv, plastics, cellphones, a.s.o.?) ?
At least third political party guys are changing the equilibrium of the fine tuned "clockwork arrangment" (NOT -YET- ORANGE ?) and trying to allow other un-established voices to be present in some public arena.
I still wonder why the .Us is still the only country (democratic...) using and admitting the "grand electeurs" electoral showcase,including conventions, well controlled "public" debates, money overspending like in a Barnum and Bailey's rock and roll horror show ,a.s.o., to elect their big leader .
I'm not authorized to comment much more on such, but consider such reminiscence of old autocratic political systems was justified when the -Us was a young country with relatively few educated people around, but now a "not so" presidential autocracy could be welcome.
The multiparty system (like in Belgium,GB, or Israel) obliges the leader of the executive to compromise in the legislative chambers to attain his seat (and become the president or first minister) , therefore a better representativity of minorities, even apostols of deconstructivism or any un-established philosophy or political idea can be presented to voters, and later disdained, forgotten , or eventually proclaimed as a victory for all the society showing then an established maturity in the process.
The .Us political system seems, from outside, still a little immature.
Indecise or non attributable .Us voters probably would love to have an option of choosing between more than two big chunks of the same system, but such option will never be authorized by the same politicial clique, to avoid others guys from those third parties to access power.
Who created or manages the electoral debates commission, btw? The legislative power ?
I wonder if it should include neutral or third parties members, apart from " the Elephant men" or "monkeydonkeys", like Nader green guys ?
:-)
:-)
(Just a brick for a positive, constructivist tought...)
Patrick
----- Original Message -----
From: "haruki" <mujyo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: The Meaninglessness of Meaning. Jacques Derrida.
> That photo was mislabeled, it was actually a shot of Ralph Nader.
>
> On Tuesday 12 October 2004 05:49 pm, Howard Ray Lawrence wrote:
> > http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110005745
> > ".. . .What is deconstruction? Mr. Derrida would never say. It was a
> > question certain to spark his contempt and ire. He denied that
> > deconstruction could be meaningfully defined. I think he was right about
> > that, though not necessarily for the reasons he believed. . ."
> >
>>
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
aren´t natural events (by instance) causing progressively so much trouble around , from a while, a visible deconstruction of our pseudo modern world centering our silly minds on $$$ ,greed ,physical comfort and material possession or control of what the masses are tought to blindly buy and consume (SUv, plastics, cellphones, a.s.o.?) ?
At least third political party guys are changing the equilibrium of the fine tuned "clockwork arrangment" (NOT -YET- ORANGE ?) and trying to allow other un-established voices to be present in some public arena.
I still wonder why the .Us is still the only country (democratic...) using and admitting the "grand electeurs" electoral showcase,including conventions, well controlled "public" debates, money overspending like in a Barnum and Bailey's rock and roll horror show ,a.s.o., to elect their big leader .
I'm not authorized to comment much more on such, but consider such reminiscence of old autocratic political systems was justified when the -Us was a young country with relatively few educated people around, but now a "not so" presidential autocracy could be welcome.
The multiparty system (like in Belgium,GB, or Israel) obliges the leader of the executive to compromise in the legislative chambers to attain his seat (and become the president or first minister) , therefore a better representativity of minorities, even apostols of deconstructivism or any un-established philosophy or political idea can be presented to voters, and later disdained, forgotten , or eventually proclaimed as a victory for all the society showing then an established maturity in the process.
The .Us political system seems, from outside, still a little immature.
Indecise or non attributable .Us voters probably would love to have an option of choosing between more than two big chunks of the same system, but such option will never be authorized by the same politicial clique, to avoid others guys from those third parties to access power.
Who created or manages the electoral debates commission, btw? The legislative power ?
I wonder if it should include neutral or third parties members, apart from " the Elephant men" or "monkeydonkeys", like Nader green guys ?
:-)
:-)
(Just a brick for a positive, constructivist tought...)
Patrick
----- Original Message -----
From: "haruki" <mujyo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: The Meaninglessness of Meaning. Jacques Derrida.
> That photo was mislabeled, it was actually a shot of Ralph Nader.
>
> On Tuesday 12 October 2004 05:49 pm, Howard Ray Lawrence wrote:
> > http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110005745
> > ".. . .What is deconstruction? Mr. Derrida would never say. It was a
> > question certain to spark his contempt and ire. He denied that
> > deconstruction could be meaningfully defined. I think he was right about
> > that, though not necessarily for the reasons he believed. . ."
> >
>>
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html